Hi and thanks for visiting the best Ravens forum on the planet. You do not have to be a member to browse the various forums, but in order to post and interact with your purple brethren, you will have to **register**. It only takes a couple of minutes. You can also use your Facebook account to log in....just click on the blue 'FConnect' link at the very top of the page.

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

As HoustonRaven all but acknowledged it could be reasonably perceived when it he prefaced his original post by saying he's not one for "tit-for-tat racial scorecards."

This isn't a tit-for-tat racial scorecard. This is a near perfect encapsulation of the problem at hand, due to the temporal proximity of the cases, the diametrically opposed facts and reactions, and utterly undeniable hypocrisy. Scorecards are subjective and debatable, this issue (these cases) is not. The fact that the Lane murder was effectively spurred into being by the hypocritical hucksters makes the issue that much more important (i.e. the hypocrisy is not harmless).

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

When did I say that the practice is not hypocritical? Cool it with your straw man.

You are excusing the hypocrisy by saying it is a sensible position. Please make an attempt to follow the arguments before telling me to cool it.

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

In my very first post in this (petty) thread I said the practice is not fair. I do, however, see how it makes sense, and I will continue to say this. Anyone with a mind for understanding history and practices of oppression and discrimination will understand that it does.

Repeating your already addressed arguments instead of making counter-arguments is a waste of time. Suffice it to say it doesn't make 'sense' in any real use of the word. And as such it should be called out (for not making sense), so it is stopped before more harm is done. Apologizing for it (by saying it is sensible) and excusing it (for being sensible) is precisely the wrong response if one is interested in peaceful race relations.

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

And before you "chime in" with an inane point along these lines: Yes, it can make sense for hypocritical things to happen.

Telling me it makes sense that humans are often hypocrites (in attempts to advance their own cause) is totally different from your original post where you argued the sensibility of the hypocritical position itself. I realize why you tried to move the goalposts, there was nothing left for you to do apparently, but I am not sure why you believed I wouldn't notice.

Simply put, had you said "it makes sense considering the people doing this have an agenda separate from relating the truth," then we aren't arguing. Because that "makes sense."

Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates

Posts

4,492

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

Your rant was too ranty for me to actually know what you were talking about here.

I don't even know what "case" you're referring to.

The Martin/Zimmerman case, and I think that was clear. And it was what the opening post and thread are about in comparison to the latest rash of senseless killings that the POTUS has decided do not merit his attention.

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Originally Posted by Haloti92

It is only petty to people who miss the point. But I repeat myself.

This isn't a tit-for-tat racial scorecard. This is a near perfect encapsulation of the problem at hand, due to the temporal proximity of the cases, the diametrically opposed facts and reactions, and utterly undeniable hypocrisy. Scorecards are subjective and debatable, this issue (these cases) is not. The fact that the Lane murder was effectively spurred into being by the hypocritical hucksters makes the issue that much more important (i.e. the hypocrisy is not harmless).

You are excusing the hypocrisy by saying it is a sensible position. Please make an attempt to follow the arguments before telling me to cool it.

Repeating your already addressed arguments instead of making counter-arguments is a waste of time. Suffice it to say it doesn't make 'sense' in any real use of the word. And as such it should be called out (for not making sense), so it is stopped before more harm is done. Apologizing for it (by saying it is sensible) and excusing it (for being sensible) is precisely the wrong response if one is interested in peaceful race relations.

Telling me it makes sense that humans are often hypocrites (in attempts to advance their own cause) is totally different from your original post where you argued the sensibility of the hypocritical position itself. I realize why you tried to move the goalposts, there was nothing left for you to do apparently, but I am not sure why you believed I wouldn't notice.

Simply put, had you said "it makes sense considering the people doing this have an agenda separate from relating the truth," then we aren't arguing. Because that "makes sense."

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

Months late, but finally reading.

Sooooo, months later, you're saying you have no cogent, reasoned rebuttal to him.

Got it.

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Months later, I'm saying his points are not worth responding to, because they are pathetic.

Ad hominem attacks mean his points are valid and you've got nothing left in the tank.

Got that too.

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Derp? I'm not going to bother responding to your diatribe when you either strongly misunderstood my original points, warped them by accident, warped them on purpose, or did some combination of all three. Not worth it. At all.

Re: If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

Derp? I'm not going to bother responding to your diatribe when you either strongly misunderstood my original points, warped them by accident, warped them on purpose, or did some combination of all three. Not worth it. At all.

I addressed them completely. And yes, you're prone to "derrp" posts that contain no argument or substance.

For example:

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

Months late, but finally reading.

and

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

No.

Months later, I'm saying his points are not worth responding to, because they are pathetic.

Now do you have anything relevant to say after taking 6 weeks to think it over? If not, I am wondering why you revived the thread.

If I Had a Son, He'd Look Like Chris Lane

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

Derp? I'm not going to bother responding to your diatribe when you either strongly misunderstood my original points, warped them by accident, warped them on purpose, or did some combination of all three. Not worth it. At all.

Fallacy of relative privation.

That's what's truly sad. But rather funny since you keep coming back to tell us it isn't worth it.

Last edited by HoustonRaven; 10-18-2013 at 03:16 PM.

WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.